cmr/d-b selection - ofccofcc.ohio.gov/portals/0/ofcc conference_afternoon... · aia ces provider...

Owners Panel Discussion

SD: Rusty Chaboudy, Coventry LSD Agency: Steve Masters, ODOT Higher Ed: Michael Bruder, Kent State PM: Bill Prenosil, OFCC Moderator: Rhonda Hagemeyer, OFCC

CMR/D-B Selection

AIA CES

Provider Name: Ohio Facilities Construction Commission

Provider Number: G442

Course Title: OFCC Conference 2015

Course Numbers: OFCC 14

Credits: 1.0 LU/HSW

Speakers: Various

Dates: July 22, 2015, July 28, 2015, August 20, 2015, August 26, 2015

AIA CES

This course is registered with AIA CES for continuing professional education. As such, it does not include content that may be deemed or construed to be an approval or endorsement by the AIA of any material of construction or any method or manner of handling, using, distributing, or dealing in any material or product. Credit(s) earned on completion of this course will be reported to AIA CES for AIA members. Certificates of Completion for both AIA members and non-AIA members are available upon request. Questions related to specific materials, methods, and services will be addressed at the conclusion of this presentation.

AIA CES – Description & Objectives Qualification based selection (QBS) is the starting point for all professional design services. While each individual selection committee may be unique, learn what a cross-section of public owners look for when selecting an Architect/Engineer for their projects. Hear multiple perspectives from K-12 school districts, higher education institutions, state agencies, and contracting authority representatives. Learn the key points of a Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) and how to effectively present during an interview. • Learning Objectives: • Gain further understanding of the QBS selection process. • Understand what owners pay attention to while reviewing SOQs. • Learn how to effectively communicate using the 330 form. • Know how to orchestrate an interview to win the job.

Questions?

Rusty Chaboudy, [email protected] Steve Masters, [email protected] Michael Bruder, [email protected] Bill Prenosil, [email protected] Rhonda Hagemeyer, [email protected]

@OHFacilities / #OFCConf15

This concludes The American Institute of Architects Continuing Education Systems Course

Provider Name: Ohio Facilities Construction Commission Provider #: G442 Contact: [email protected]

Don’t forget to sign the CEU request form at the back of the session room.

Steve Zannoni, Project Management Consultants Ramzi Najjar, OFCC

Effective GMP Documentation

AIA CES





Credits: 1.0 LU/HSW

Speakers: Various


AIA CES

This course is registered with AIA CES for continuing professional education. As such, it does not include content that may be deemed or construed to be an approval or endorsement by the AIA of any material of construction or any method or manner of handling, using, distributing, or dealing in any material or product. Credit(s) earned on completion of this course will be reported to AIA CES for AIA members. Certificates of Completion for both AIA members and non-AIA members are available upon request. Questions related to specific materials, methods, and services will be addressed at the conclusion of this presentation.

AIA CES – Description & Objectives At some point during the pre-construction stage of a Design-Build (DB) project the Criteria Architect/Engineer is required to communicate the owner’s design intent through design criteria documents. These design criteria documents are then transferred to the Design-Build team with the Architect/Engineer of Record, to further develop and implement. Learn what makes design criteria documents effective based on the complexity of the project and timing of the transfer of bridging documents to the DB team. • Learning Objectives: • Gain further understanding of pre-construction activities on DB

projects. • Know how to recognize the interplay of bridging documents and a

project’s complexity. • Understand what level of detail to develop design criteria documents. • Learn when the best time to transfer design responsibility to DB team.

GMP Amendment • Should be a relatively easy process • Many times it is difficult and time

consuming • Why?

– Team not communicating effectively – Team has failed to honestly deal with

challenges especially budget issues – One or more team members have

unreasonable expectations

Responsibilities of Owner

• Confirm and identify project’s GMP Budget – Starts with accurate Estimated Budget in RFQ

and RFP – Confirmed at start of project

• Define scope/timing expectations for the project’s GMP

• Identify realistic expectations of Liquidated Damages (LD’s)

Organizational Meeting Need to have a serious discussion about: • Scope and Timing of GMP(s) and the

development of a realistic project schedule • Level of detail for the GMP Basis Documents • Coordination of Estimate Protocol • Estimates by A/E and CM should include all

the GMP elements per article 1 of GMP Amendment

• Level of detail in submitted estimates

Organizational Meeting (cont’d)

• Confirm alignment of scope, schedule, and budget at end of each stage

• SD & DD estimates should be a “dress-rehearsal for the GMP

• Discuss Team’s expectations of LD Milestones

• How to deal with budget issues and how that relates to alternates and ultimate GMP

Organizational Meeting (cont’d) • Solicitation of bids before the GMP

Amendment is executed. – What is an acceptable strategy? – Cannot enter into a subcontract until GMP

Amendment is executed

• Purpose/function of different Contingencies – CM Contingency – Owner Contingency – “Risk Holds”?

• Use of Subcontractor Default Insurance (SDI)

Contractor’s Pre-Qualification Plan • Timing • What does “Review by Owner” mean? • When to keep or drop a sub-contractor

on/off list

GMP Amendment • Exhibit to Agreement

– CMR – Exhibit D – D/B – Exhibit G

• Article 1 “Contract Sum and Related Items…” – Recap of Contract Sum (Table)

• Article 2 “Contract Times” – Contract Times (Table)

• Are multiple GMP Amendments for one project additive?

Design Intent & Assumptions and Clarifications (As&Cs) • What are Design Intent Statements? • AE’s to prepare thoughtful and appropriate

Design Intent Statements • CM’s to recognize that As&Cs are not for

changing the contract terms • As&Cs could include agreed-upon changes

to Staffing and GC Costs • Design Intent Statements and As&Cs are 2

sides of the same “scope-clarification coin”

Allowances

• Are all Allowances bad? • Difference between appropriate and

inappropriate allowances • Challenge of “hidden” allowances in AE’s

specs or the CM’s subcontractor scopes

Alternates

• Should be easy to incorporate in work • Determine timing/deadlines to make

selection decisions • How do we pay for them?

– Early release of bid day savings?

Questions?

Steve Zannoni, [email protected] Ramzi Najjar, [email protected]

Jeff Westhoven, OFCC Craig Weise, OFCC

OFCC Contract Document Updates

AIA CES





Credits: 1.0 LU/HSW

Speakers: Various


Course Description

During this presentation you will learn about recent changes to OFCC contract documents for Construction Manager at Risk, Design-Build, and Design-Bid-Build projects, and a new form of contract for Limited Scope projects. This session will examine the State’s response to industry feedback on its standard contract documents related to risk management and fairness of contract terms and conditions. Changes to the A/E standard terms and conditions and General Conditions for specific delivery methods will also be presented.

Learning Objectives

• Describe the key features of the State's contract documents, including the new Limited Scope contract and conditions.

• Review the reduced liquidated damages schedule, changes to closeout procedures, addition of defective work provisions, and the mutual waiver of consequential damages.

Learning Objectives

• Discuss changes in CM at Risk and Design-Build contracts related to GMP negotiation and amendment processes, selection of design assist firms during the preconstruction stage, and enhancements to subcontractor prequalification and bidding processes.

• Explain revisions to the State’s architect/engineer standard terms and conditions related to requirements for professional liability insurance policy limits and forms.

Approach to document changes

• Stability has its virtues

• Less frequent edits are the goal

• Edits may be necessary for law changes

• Minor/non-substantive changes would be reflected in version control documents

Limited Scope Documents

Limited Scope Documents

• This concept became a priority when the industry expressed the need for a simpler form of contract, when project size and complexity did not require the boilerplate language in our current agreements.

• The Attorney General’s Office was also looking for a compact agreement for projects less than $200,000.

When to use them?

• Estimated value less than $1,000,000 since Liquidated Damages limited to $500 per day

• One Milestone date to which Liquidated Damages apply (Substantial Completion)

• Disturbs less than one acre of land and does not require NPDES permit from EPA

When to use them?

• Constructs or renovates an area less than 5,000 square feet and does not require a Life Cycle Cost Analysis

• Single contractor with a single bid package for which contractor is not a Joint Venture

• Does not include Allowances or Unit Prices in the bid (no need to reconcile)

What is different about them?

• Legal language remains but simplified • Process language reduced significantly • Contracting Authority role merged with

Owner role (local administration friendly) • Allowances and Unit Prices eliminated • Change Directives eliminated • Contract Times revised to Contract Time • Schedule controls reduced

Terms that do not appear in LS

• LEED • Neutral facilitation • Coordination drawings • Commissioning • Partnering • Contractor performance evaluation • Allowances • Unit prices

Limited Scope General Contracting • Instructions to

Bidders – 12 pages • Bid Form – 6 pages • Agreement – 3 pages • Definitions – 0 pages • General Conditions –

27 pages • Wage Rates – 0 pages • Total – 48 pages

• Instructions to Bidders – 13 pages

• Bid Form – 7 pages • Agreement – 4 pages • Definitions – 9 pages • General Conditions –

60 pages • Wage Rates – 1 page • Total – 94 pages

Limited Scope v. General Contracting

What’s Next?

Joint Ventures and LLCs

• We are working on language to add to each of the contracts to accommodate teams of firms and deal with the unique bonding and insurance requirements of each.

• There will also be a variation of the signature page to accommodate more than one signer for the contractor team.

Energy Performance Contracts

• We will be revising our energy performance contract to align it with the 2014 edition.

• It may also have some of the edits used in the Limited Scope version to reduce its size and complexity (these contracts are already complex enough).

Procurement Contract

• We are exploring a version of the Standard Requirements for procuring furniture, fixtures and equipment, as well as other items that only require simple installation or placement and not full construction services.

• Goal = available by the end of the fiscal year.

Standard Requirements Quiz

1. Defective Work

Who corrects Defective Work after expiration of the Correction Period? A. The Owner B. The Contractor C. The Contractor or Owner D. The Commissioning Agent

1. Defective Work

6.23.2.4 After the Correction Period. If the Owner issues notice under Section 6.23.2.1 after expiration of the Correction Period, the Owner may correct the Defective Work without giving further notice to the Contractor or Contractor’s Surety if the Contractor fails to (1) notify the Owner in writing of the Contractor’s intent to correct the Defective Work within 14 days after the Owner issues the notice and (2) thereafter promptly commence and diligently pursue correction of Defective Work.

2. Substantial Completion

THINK NOT


When is the Work determined to have achieved Substantial Completion? A. The Owner can utilize the Work for its

intended use. B. The A/E determines the Work

Substantially Complete. C. The Certificate of Occupancy is issued. D. All of the above.


The stage in the progress of the Work when the Work (or designated portion of the Work for which the Contracting Authority and Owner have agreed to take Partial Occupancy) is sufficiently complete in accordance with the Contract that the Owner can utilize the Work for its intended use, as determined by the A/E. The issuance of a certificate of occupancy or partial certificate of occupancy (if applicable) is a condition precedent to the achievement of Substantial Completion.

3. Liquidated Damages

How did OFCC revise the schedule of Liquidated Damages? A. LD per day sums increased. B. LD per day sums decreased. C. LD per day sums increased for Contract

Sums less than $10 million. D. LD per day sums decreased for Contract

Sums $10 million and over.

3. Liquidated Damages

Contract Sum Liquidated Damages per day

Less than $1,000,000 $500

From $1,000,000.01 to $2,000,000 $1,000

From $2,000,000.01 to $5,000,000 $2,000

From $5,000,000.01 to $10,000,000 $5,000

From $10,000,000.01 to $20,000,000 $10,000 $7,500

From $20,000,000.01 to $50,000,000 $20,000 $10,000

More than $50,000,000 $50,000 $15,000

4. Consequential Damages The Owner and Contractor each waive damages from:

A. Loss of use, income, revenue, cost of capital, management and employee productivity.

B. Losses of financing, business, and reputation; loss of profit; and consequential damages arising from termination of the Contract or related to insolvency.

C. Unabsorbed home office overhead; increased cost of funds for the Project; lost opportunity to work on other projects; loss of bonding capacity.

4. Consequential Damages 8.8.1.1 The Owner’s waiver includes Claims for loss of use, income, profit, revenue, financing, cost of capital, business and reputation, management and employee productivity, and consequential damages arising from termination of the Contract or related to insolvency.8.8.1.2 The Contractor’s waiver includes Claims for unabsorbed home-office overhead; any other form of overhead in excess of that specifically provided for under Section 7.7;delay damages except as otherwise specifically provided for in Section 8.6; increased cost of funds for the Project; lost opportunity to work on other projects; losses of financing, business, and reputation; loss of profit except anticipated profit arising directly from properly performed Work; loss of bonding capacity; and consequential damages arising from termination of the Contract or related to insolvency.

5. Use of Electronic Files

The Owner and Contractor shall:

A. Indemnify the other party from claims related to its use of electronic files.

B. Verify and use electronic files it receives from another party at its own risk.

C. Not share or receive electronic files from another party.

D. Use paper documents only.

5. Use of Electronic Files 12.1.3.4 Before relying on any Electronic File it receives, the recipient is responsible for verifying that the Electronic File was not altered through transmission, degradation of the recipient’s own storage media, or other causes.12.1.3.5 If the recipient of an Electronic File converts/translates the Electronic File from its original system or format to an alternate system or format, the recipient assumes the risk that the conversion/translation created errors in the converted/translated file.

6. Timing of Subcontractor Bidding

The CM/DB will conduct the Subcontractor bidding process: A. After the GMP Amendment has been executed. B. Before the GMP Amendment is executed. C. Any time during the Preconstruction Stage.

6. Timing of Subcontractor Bidding

4.5.1 The CM/DB shall create a Bid package for each Subcontract and solicit Bids from qualified prospective Bidders identified under Section 4.4 forthat Bid package in accordance with the Project Schedule. Execution of a GMP Amendment concerning the Work for which the CM/DB is soliciting Bids is not a condition precedent to commencement or completion of the Subcontract Bidding Process.

7. Submission of Subcontracts The CM/DB will submit a copy of the executed Subcontract: A. Not less than 10 days before Work is to be

performed by the Subcontractor.

B. With the Subcontractor and Material Supplier Declaration form.

C. After execution of a GMP Amendment concerning the Work to be performed by a Subcontractor.

D. All of the above.

7. Submission of Subcontracts 4.5.5.2.2 No less than 10 days before Work is to be performed by the Subcontractor, or within a shorter period as mutually agreed by the CM/DB and Contracting Authority, the CM/DB shall submit to the A/E/Contracting Authority a Subcontractor and Material Supplier Declaration form through which the CM/DB identifies the Subcontractor along with a complete copy of the executed Subcontract between the CM/DB and Subcontractor. (we are researching timing validity)4.5.2.2.3 Execution of a GMP Amendment concerning the Work to be performed by the Subcontractor is a condition precedent to the CM/DB entering into the Subcontract with that Subcontractor.

8. Owner Rejects Subcontractor

What happens if the Owner rejects the CM/DB proposed Subcontractor?

A. CM/DB must replace with no increase in the Contract Sum.

B. CM/DB may use contingency to make up the difference.

C. CM/DB may request an increase in the Contract Sum.

8. Owner Rejects Subcontractor 4.5.2.3.1 If the majority of the Work included in the Bid package that the CM/DB proposed to award to the rejected Bidder is covered by a GMP Amendment before the Contracting Authority rejects the CM/DB-proposed Bidder, and the rejected Bidder was reasonably capable of performing the Work included in that Bid package, the CM/DB may request an increase of the Contract Sum by giving written notice under Section 7.3.2; provided, however, that the increase shall not be greater than the difference between the Bid of the rejected Bidder and the Bid of the replacement Bidder as the CM/DB presented those Bids as described under Section 4.5.2.

9. Design Assist Firm Selection

The CM/DB shall engage Design Assist Firms through: A. Competitive bidding. B. Qualifications-based selection. C. Best value selection. D. Open book pricing method.

9. Design Assist Firm Selection 4.8.2 The CM/DB shall award authorized design-assist contracts on the basis of the CM/DB’s evaluation of a submission to the CM/DB from each potential Design-Assist Firm that (1) establishes the qualifications of the potential Design-Assist Firm to provide the associated design-assist services and Work and (2) includes a proposal for (a) the potential Design-Assist Firm’s portion of the CM/DB’s Preconstruction Stage Reimbursable Expenses, Preconstruction Stage Personnel Costs, and General Conditions Costs; and (b) the potential Design-Assist Firm’s Construction Stage overhead and profit mark-ups and Construction Stage contingency.

10. Timing of GMP Negotiation

The GMP proposal and negotiation process will begin: A. At completion of the Design

Development Stage. B. At completion of the Construction

Documents Stage. C. Unless otherwise agreed, when the

Construction Documents Stage is 50 percent complete.

10. Timing of GMP Negotiation

5.7.1 Commencement. Unless the Contracting Authority agrees otherwise in writing as provided under Section 5.2.2.7 or Section 5.7.1.1, the GMP Proposal and Amendment process will begin on the date that marks expiration of 50 percent of the time allotted in the Project Schedule for the Construction Documents Stage.

Bonus: Professional Liability Insurance

Limits of PLI for A/Es were: A. Increased in 2012 and 2014. B. Increased in 2012 and reduced slightly in 2014. C. Reduced in 2012 and reduced again in 2014.

Bonus: Professional Liability Insurance

Construction Budget Each Claim Annual Aggregate

Up to $25,000,000 $10,000,000 $1,000,000 $2,000,000

From $25,000,000.01 $10,000,000.01 to $50,000,000 $25,000,000 $2,000,000 $3,000,000 $4,000,000 $3,000,000

From $50,000,000.01 $25,000,000.01 to $100,000,000 $50,000,000 $5,000,000 $5,000,000

More than $100,000,000 $50,000,000 $10,000,000 $10,000,000

Questions?

Lane Beougher, [email protected] Jeff Westhoven, [email protected] Craig Weise, [email protected]

@OHFacilities / #OFCConf15

Jeffrey Westhoven Chief of Facility & Program Services

Business Opportunities

School Districts – Potential Projects

District County State Share Local Share Total Budget

Ayersville Local Defiance $20,291,730 $9,994,434 $30,286,164

Champion Local Trumbull $17,552,720 $13,791,422 $31,344,142

Chillicothe City Ross $25,687,894 $21,017,367 $46,705,261

Cuyahoga Falls City Summit $22,477,820 $60,773,367 $83,251,187

Firelands Local Lorain $6,238,379 $26,595,193 $32,833,572

Lake Local Stark $42,034,217 $47,400,287 $89,434,504

Poland Local Mahoning $7,143,557 $30,454,109 $37,597,666

Reading Community City Hamilton $27,525,097 $23,447,304 $50,972,401

Southwest Local Hamilton $24,524,108 $69,799,383 $94,323,491

Total $193,475,522 $303,272,866 $496,748,388

Ohio School Facilities Commission Funded Districts – July 9, 2015

Best Value Selection (BVS)

Qualifications-based Selection (QBS)

Community Schools Classroom Facilities Assistance Program

• Authorized in H.B. 64 (operating budget bill) on June 30, 2015

• Up to $50 million

• $25 million in state funds

• Grant program requires 1:1 state/local match

Community Schools Classroom Facilities Assistance Program

• Purchase, construction, renovation, addition

• Increase the supply of seats in effective schools

• Grants approved by School Facilities Commission and Ohio Department of Education

• Grant program guidelines to be approved in late 2015

Cultural Facilities Grant Program

Project Name Appropriation

Amount County City Pro Football Hall of Fame $ 10,000,000 Stark Canton Union Terminal Restoration $ 5,000,000 Hamilton Cincinnati Cincinnati Music Hall Revitalization $ 5,000,000 Hamilton Cincinnati Cleveland Museum of Natural History $ 2,500,000 Cuyahoga Cleveland Preserving & Updating the Historic Dayton Art Institute $ 2,198,500 Montgomery Dayton Hamilton County Memorial Hall $ 2,000,000 Hamilton Cincinnati Cincinnati Zoo $ 2,000,000 Hamilton Cincinnati Columbus Theater-Based Community Development Project $ 1,000,000 Franklin Columbus Fulton County Visitor and Heritage Center $ 1,000,000 Fulton Wauseon Columbus Zoo and Aquarium $ 1,000,000 Franklin Columbus Cincinnati Zoo - Big Cat Facility $ 1,000,000 Hamilton Cincinnati

Cultural Facilities Grant Program

Project Name Appropriation

Amount County City Cincinnati Art Museum - Make Room for Art $ 825,000 Hamilton Cincinnati CCAD Cinematic Arts and Motion Capture Studio & Auditorium $ 750,000 Franklin Columbus Marion Palace Theatre $ 731,000 Marion Marion Imagination Station Improvements $ 695,000 Lucas Toledo Wood County Historical Center & Museum Accessibility Project $ 600,000 Wood

Bowling Green

Incline Theater Project $ 550,000 Hamilton Cincinnati Akron Civic Theater $ 530,261 Summit Akron Kan Du Community Arts Center $ 520,000 Hancock Findlay Stuart's Opera House $ 500,000 Athens Nelsonville Great Lakes Science Center Omnimax Theatre $ 500,000 Cuyahoga Cleveland West Side Market Renovation $ 500,000 Cuyahoga Cleveland Stambaugh Auditorium $ 500,000 Mahoning Youngstown Historic Sidney Theatre $ 500,000 Shelby Sidney

Other Potential Projects

• Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction projects

Craig Weise & OFCC Staff

Ask OFCC